Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Watch Christian Bale as Moses in Ridley Scott's 'Exodus' (Redone 10 Commandments) Trailer. EPIC!
The Verge ^ | July 9, 2014 | Aaron Souppouris

Posted on 07/09/2014 5:47:10 AM PDT by lbryce

Direct Link To Trailer:Ridley Scott's "Exodus"(Redone"10 Commandments")

The biblical epic of Moses has inspired generations of creatives, but Egypt has never looked as dour as in the first trailer for Ridley Scott's Exodus: Gods and Kings. The movie will star Christian Bale as a mean and muscular Moses, and looks set to follow the events laid out in the book of the same name. Exodus tells the story of Moses attempting to free his people from enslavement in Egypt. Expect to see plagues, burning bushes, Breaking Bad's Aaron Paul as Moses' sidekick Joshua, and of course the titular exodus, when Gods and Kings hits theaters this December.


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: moses; tencommmandments
Ridley Scott is one of the greatest directors of our time. Watching "Exodus" for the 1:38 clip ,you've got to be riveted by what you see, an exhilarating motion picture sure to be an epic once again. At 1:06 I was shocked to see Sigourney Weaver looking not quite her best.
1 posted on 07/09/2014 5:47:11 AM PDT by lbryce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Mr. Scott certainly knows how to ‘cash in’ as most entertainers and Hollywood types will soon be doing.

Box office receipts are down.. they’ll do ANYTHING for a paycheck...even pretend to religious sensibilities.


2 posted on 07/09/2014 5:50:31 AM PDT by SMARTY ("When you blame others, you give up your power to change." Robert Anthony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Moses’s sidekick?


3 posted on 07/09/2014 5:54:16 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch (http://thegatwickview.tumblr.com/ http://thepurginglutheran.tumblr.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

I hope it’s not a hatchet-job like Noah. I would love to see a well-made film faithful to the biblical narrative.


4 posted on 07/09/2014 5:59:13 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

Wonder how you felt about the 1966 film “The Bible”. I haven’t seen it but wondered if you had, what you thought of it.


5 posted on 07/09/2014 6:03:25 AM PDT by lbryce (Barack Obama:Misbegotten, Bastard Offspring of Satan and Medusa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

The old standby wasnt exactly faithful either, but it was respectful, very entertaining none the less.


6 posted on 07/09/2014 6:06:12 AM PDT by wyowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
Ridley Scott is one of the greatest directors of our time. Watching "Exodus" for the 1:38 clip ,you've got to be riveted by what you see, an exhilarating motion picture sure to be an epic once again. At 1:06 I was shocked to see Sigourney Weaver looking not quite her best.

Sorry, but all I can think of whenever I see the name Ridley Scott is Left-wing Propagandist.
7 posted on 07/09/2014 6:08:38 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

It would be neat to see a plague of velociraptors instead of say, frogs.


8 posted on 07/09/2014 6:09:21 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Yes, I’ve seen it, but it’s probably been 30-35 years and I don’t have a strong opinion on it. It was a John Huston epic with a number of great actors. I think it was generally entertaining, but the way I remember it the writers took more creative license and strayed from the Bible more than I would have liked. For whatever reason it didn’t make nearly the impression on me some other Bible-based films have made. Wish I could be more helpful.


9 posted on 07/09/2014 6:25:32 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wyowolf

I agree. Today I’m surprised when Hollywood is respectful.


10 posted on 07/09/2014 6:26:31 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

I hope it has a nonsensical script a la “Prometheus.”


11 posted on 07/09/2014 6:28:41 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt

Well the problem is there is almost no biblical narrative. There’s just not that much there. I’ve got zero problem with poetic license as long as you don’t put Noah skiing behind the ark


12 posted on 07/09/2014 6:35:37 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Kindly name a movie and the specific left wing ideology he espoused.


13 posted on 07/09/2014 6:36:17 AM PDT by lbryce (Barack Obama:Misbegotten, Bastard Offspring of Satan and Medusa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

“Ridley Scott is one of the greatest directors of our time.”

You wouldn’t know it from watching “The Counselor” though. Most horrible piece of junk I’ve seen in years.


14 posted on 07/09/2014 6:37:29 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

You really aren’t being fair. You’re just looking to be argumentative. Okay. “The Counselor” is the most horrible piece of junk I’ve ever seen. And I was wrong. Very wrong.
He’s not at all a director of any substance. He’s actually a horrible director. Case closed. I’m outta here.


15 posted on 07/09/2014 6:42:01 AM PDT by lbryce (Barack Obama:Misbegotten, Bastard Offspring of Satan and Medusa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Well, there was his Robin Hood which he made into an allegory about British/American intervention in the Middle East.


16 posted on 07/09/2014 6:46:27 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Oh, yeah, how can we forget “1492: Conquest of Paradise” with its typical leftie vilification of Europeans, or “Kingdom of Heaven” glorifying the Muslims while denigrating the Crusaders, or “GI Jane” & “Thelma & Louise” pushing the radical feminist agenda.


17 posted on 07/09/2014 6:51:19 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

“You really aren’t being fair. You’re just looking to be argumentative.”

Nope, just pointing out that his most recent work has not been up to par, so I am not holding my breath that he gets it right this time around.


18 posted on 07/09/2014 6:52:26 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Didn’t see “1492” but your description of “Kingdom of Heaven” is what I constantly read on FR. Then I saw it, and I really didn’t see the denigration. There was an asshole Crusader, a king who was trying to keep the peace, and the Muslims were brutal as hell. They also got their asses handed to them, which was gratifying. I also had to agree with the overall lesson that “it’s just a city of landmarks, it’s not worth that much bloodshed.” Especially since I know how the story ends anyway.


19 posted on 07/09/2014 6:54:04 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

To those not wishing to install QuickTime...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJq7MBa7jHY


20 posted on 07/09/2014 6:55:55 AM PDT by kanawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

Thanks but it was pulled from youtube.

I’m not going to download software to watch a trailer video, so I guess I’m out of luck.


21 posted on 07/09/2014 7:28:25 AM PDT by ansel12 (LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater

“There was an asshole Crusader, a king who was trying to keep the peace, and the Muslims were brutal as hell.”

But, the Crusaders were depicted as aggressors, invaders, and the Muslims were depicted as defending themselves against murderous Christians, which is quite the opposite of the actual history behind the events.

“I also had to agree with the overall lesson that “it’s just a city of landmarks, it’s not worth that much bloodshed.””

In the film, the Muslims didn’t “get” that lesson and walk away from Jerusalem, the Crusader did. It’s very obviously a message that he only wants the modern day “Crusaders” to worry about. No need for the Muslims to stop fighting to keep all the lands they conquered, they just get a pass.


22 posted on 07/09/2014 7:29:50 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
it was pulled from youtube

Wow, that was quick.

23 posted on 07/09/2014 7:34:55 AM PDT by kanawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater; Boogieman
Didn’t see “1492” but your description of “Kingdom of Heaven” is what I constantly read on FR. Then I saw it, and I really didn’t see the denigration. There was an asshole Crusader, a king who was trying to keep the peace, and the Muslims were brutal as hell. They also got their asses handed to them, which was gratifying. I also had to agree with the overall lesson that “it’s just a city of landmarks, it’s not worth that much bloodshed.” Especially since I know how the story ends anyway.
Well, how about we start here with trying to provide some balance to the movie and your post:

Kingdom of Heaven - Hollywood's Crusade Against History

snip

Kingdom of Heaven also distorts history beyond all recognition. The "hundred-year truce" between the Christian and Muslim armies is a figment of their imagination. The warfare throughout the 12th Century was incessant.

The depiction of the Knight's Templar as a band of religious fanatics trying to shatter the truce and provoke war with the Muslims by attacking caravans is a total fabrication. No Knight's Templar ever attacked any caravans. Attacking caravans is what the founder of Islam, Muhammad, engaged in regularly as did his handpicked apostles, the Caliphs. The Knights Templar were formed primarily to protect travelers from the attacks of the Muslim army. In fact it was the slaughter of Christian pilgrims, by Muslim armies, in violation of earlier agreements of safe passage that precipitated the crusades in the first place.

The central figure of this film, Sir Balian, is a historical figure, did in fact play a critical role in the defense of Jerusalem in 1187, but the film script distorts his character and role beyond all recognition. First of all, Balian was not a blacksmith, nor did his wife commit suicide, nor was he illegitimate, nor raised as a commoner. His father, Balian the Old (not Godfrey as in the movie), had three sons, all legitimate: Hugh, Baldwin and Balian. Balian never had to travel to the Holy Land, because he grew up as part of the nobility there. Balian was married to royalty long before the events portrayed in the film, and he was not at all romantically involved with the Princess Sybilla. (His brother, Baldwin, had some love interest in Sybilla.)

In Kingdom of Heaven, Balian is portrayed as questioning whether God exists, although according to the historical records it is clear that Balian was a dedicated Christian who took his faith very seriously. Nor did Balian desert the defense of the Holy Land following the fall of Jerusalem. Far from returning to France, Balian proceeded to Beirut in Lebanon which he helped fortify against Muslim invasion. He was present with Richard the Lionhearted at the signing of the peace with Saladin, which secured safe passage for Christian pilgrims and recognized crusader control over the 90 mile stretch of coastline from Tyre to Jaffa.


There is much more to this article, and most scholars of this time period in the western world really panned this movie as just propaganda for the Muzzies.
24 posted on 07/09/2014 8:03:08 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
Kindly name a movie and the specific left wing ideology he espoused.
Please see post #24.
25 posted on 07/09/2014 8:05:01 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

FINALLY!
Looks like a movie I’d go see in the theatre.


26 posted on 07/09/2014 8:06:23 AM PDT by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
I hope it’s not a hatchet-job like Noah. I would love to see a well-made film faithful to the biblical narrative.

From the "Trailer" it appears NOT to be consistent with the Bible's account. This "Moses" looks like a warrior. The Bible shows Moses to be a meek prophet of God, not a sword wielding gladiator.

The Charleston Heston epic (1956) also diverges greatly from the Bible account. The Bible makes it very clear that the entire thrust is to stage the Passover and the blood atonement via the symbolic slain lambs. And yet, Cecil B. DeMille comes out on stage before the start of the movie ("The 10 Commandments") and tells us it is a "struggle of a people to gain their freedom." This completely misses the mark. All God's signs and wonders were to point to the real passover, Jesus Christ.

For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. 1 Corinthians 5:7b
Just as the '56 film does not close the loop with the NT, I am sure that this 2014 offering will diverge even further.
27 posted on 07/09/2014 8:11:47 AM PDT by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nonsporting

Moses wasn’t the sharpest tool in the drawer. The dialogue between God and Moses is actually funny, and Aaron gets impressed into service because God loses His cool with Moses.

God uses ordinary people to do extraordinary things.


28 posted on 07/09/2014 8:13:43 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I honestly didn’t watch it for the history lesson. I figure any “historical” Hollywood movie I watch will be pretty inaccurate whether due to agenda or just simple creative license in order to condense years of events into a 2-hr movie.

Such movies have only as much historical power as we’re willing to allow them. Much ado about nothing.


29 posted on 07/09/2014 9:07:31 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

He may be a great director but he excels in historical revisionism. I’m sure he will somehow turn Moses into the villain and the Egyptians into poor misunderstood victims.


30 posted on 07/09/2014 9:16:23 AM PDT by Sam Gamgee (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Kingdom of Heaven is rife with anti-Western pro-Islamic historical revisionism.


31 posted on 07/09/2014 9:17:33 AM PDT by Sam Gamgee (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nonsporting; SpinnerWebb
The Bible shows Moses to be a meek prophet of God

You're kidding, right?

32 posted on 07/09/2014 9:28:05 AM PDT by tx_eggman (Liberalism is only possible in that moment when a man chooses Barabas over Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Sam Gamgee

First Look - Trailer for Ridley Scott's 'Exodus: Gods and Kings'

[...]

Those of you arguing that Scott can't deliver because he's an atheist should rethink that. The best example I can give you is Nicholas Ray, who directed the splendid remake of "King of Kings" in 1961.

There's nothing to indicate that Ray was an out-and-out atheist but by 1961 the 50 year-old director of "Rebel Without a Cause," "Johnny Guitar," and "The Flying Leathernecks" was a twice-divorced, sexually confused bisexual with a crippling drug and alcohol problem. The following decade he would appear in a sex film where young girls received communion by performing oral sex on him.

Atheist, I can't say. Hedonist, oh my yes, and then some.

"King of Kings" would be Ray's last completed feature film, but it is a beautiful Christian film that affirms the faith. If Ray can pull it off, so can Scott. The question is… Does he want to?

[...]

33 posted on 07/09/2014 9:32:10 AM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Watched it during easter week. I fell asleep and was unmotivated to finish it.

I would recomend watching the “Ten Commandments”, “The Robe” or practically any other biblical epic instead.


34 posted on 07/09/2014 9:36:14 AM PDT by yuleeyahoo (Liberty is not collective, it is personal. All liberty is individual liberty. - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Try this one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl9fEnGH7nM


35 posted on 07/09/2014 9:41:17 AM PDT by yuleeyahoo (Liberty is not collective, it is personal. All liberty is individual liberty. - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman
You're kidding, right?

In a way, he was.

He whined about not being a good speaker and begged God to make his brother Aaron the leader... God had to light a fire under him at times.
36 posted on 07/09/2014 9:41:41 AM PDT by SpinnerWebb (IN-SAPORIBVS-SICVT-PVLLVM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
Such movies have only as much historical power as we’re willing to allow them. Much ado about nothing.

For you and I, seasoned conservative thinkers, yes.

For those in the formative stages of political thought, it is this type of propaganda used by the left to mold the thought processes and political thinking of just these people.

Reagan knew this and fought it tooth and nail, so to speak, when he was President of the Screen Actors Guild.
37 posted on 07/09/2014 9:59:21 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: yuleeyahoo

Thanks for the youtube link.


38 posted on 07/09/2014 12:23:44 PM PDT by ansel12 (LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson